In the pages of Dartmouth history
an honorable place will always be held by President Nichols. The graduates of the early nineteen hundreds will recall him in his early faculty days, making the best of the meagre facilities of Reed Hall. They will remember the enthusiasm of his satisfaction in the adequate laboratories of Wilder Hall.
A later generation saw him return after a period of university teaching to take up the burden laid down by Dr. Tucker. For seven years he held the College to its steady course, faithful to his promise in responding to Dr. Tuckers "Welcome to the Wheelock Succession" :
I hrough the years which may be given me to serve this college worthily, I shall guard and cherish this symbol of the Wheelock Succession for the mighty hands through which it has passed, hands which have held high the sacred torch of knowledge to light the homes, the work shops, the streets of the world," that none should grope in darkness, nqr lose his way, nor run into any kind of danger because of mental or moral ignorance. I shall cherish this symbol of the Wheelock Succession the more, sir, because it has come into my hands from you, whom I have known and loved as my chieftain."
Although the failing health of recent years interrupted Dr. Nichols' closer contacts with the College, Dartmouth men have always been aware of his abiding interest and affection. They will remember with respect and gratitude his contribution to research, to education, and in particular to Dartmouth College.
The secretaries have come and gone and as usual left the College in their debt for the brief visit. We venture to say that there is no organization of the alumni which contains greater influence, both actual and potential, for the welfare of the College. Here are the springs of sentiment that so often lead to positive action. An organization that can lay claim to starting such movements as the Alumni Fund, the Alumni Council and the ALUMNI MAGAZINE may well feel that it has made an important contribution to the progress of the College.
But the Association does not rest on its past accomplishments. It is at present, if that were possible, even more active and interested than in the past. A perusal of the minutes of the last annual meeting as recorded in this issue of the MAGAZINE will indicate some of the problems with which the secretaries are wrestling at present.
Few moments in the college year are more impressive than the roll call of the secretaries when the unbroken line of sixty years rises, and each one responds for his class. For two days the representatives of two generations of Dartmouth men meet and consider in common their secretarial and alumni problems. This agency of class and college solidarity does far more than we shall ever realize to unify and harmonize the various interests of a growing alumni body.
Alumni will learn with, mixed emotions of the experiment now being made with morning chapel. The younger vintages of graduates have all been through periods of discussion, more or less virulent, as to the desirability of preserving this ancient and honorable tradition. In the days when discipline was less questioned, both in the home and the school, it is safe to say that hardly any one questioned the institution.
It is not necessary to review all the arguments for or against the chapel exercise as it has been observed since the days of the fathers. The critic will concede the value of starting the day with a general college gathering at a religious service but he will counter with the argument that since the dawn of history compulsion in worship has never led to the desired result.
It should be definitely understood at present, however, that no permanent procedure has been established. Chaplain Janeway has received authority to experiment with the morning service with a view to ascertaining what in his opinion will bring the best returns to the College and the participants in the service. On the basis of this experience a final decision may be made.
Since Easter, therefore, the chapel service has been voluntary. The attendance has naturally diminished to a marked degree, but a real spirit of worship is evident. The balancing of values must come later.
A clear line of demarcation seems to be developing between the opposing positions on the question of methods of choosing alumni trustees. The broadest possible statement seems to be that some would prefer a more "democratic method of balloting, even if it resulted in somewhat less efficient boards of trustees; and that others seek the method which gave the most efficient boards, even if in the process there had to be a curtailment of the appearance of "democracy." The underlying question, then, seems to be, which is the more important for the welfare of the College —means or ends ? Those who earnestly advocate the importance of the means usually base their contention on the fact that the interest of the whole alumni body is a thing which can best be cultivated in this way,, and insist that it is so far vital that it transcends any fear that the choices made would be somewhat less competent than are those now made by a system of winnowing candidates in the Alumni Council.
This matter presses for decision and will be presented for action at the coming meeting of the Alumni Association. The report of the committee appointed to consider the whole question appears elsewhere in this issue. The MAGAZINE has no wish to dogmatize with regard to it, but must nevertheless express a certain sympathy with the idea that what we are really after is the most capable board of managers we can get, no matter how we get them. It is possible, we believe, to over-estimate the worth of methods, even admitting their great importance; and it is possible also to exaggerate the virtues of ostensibly "democratic" systems, by imputing to voters in general capacities vastly exceeding those which voters commonly possess or at least are willing to use. Experiences in American politics have certainly tended to prove that the theories of political action by large masses of men need to be strictly qualified by a recognition of the handicaps imposed by human nature. Human beings are what they are—not what they ought in theory to be. It is a possible assumption that any alumni body, widely scattered as it is and composed of men who are engrossed with their own affairs, would bring to a more general balloting for college trustees a rather vague conception and would often vote by guess, rather than with definite knowledge or definite purposes.
That, however, is obviously a point as to which critics differ. It is never possible to secure complete unanimity as to the way in which a new political system will work. It may be suggested, however, that the wise thing is first to weigh all the probabilities, in the light of what we already know about referenda in general, in order to discover whether it is really likely that a more general ballot would work out in practice as well as it is assumed to do in theory. From their observation in other fields, the editors are led to entertain a certain skepticism.
In any case it may be cordially agreed that whatever system prevails will have its defects, and the question may not inappropriately be treated from that angle. Which alternative brings the less tolerable evils in its train? That which now confines the real choice of trustees to a small council, with a rather perfunctory subsequent ratification by the whole body of alumni ? Or that which would omit the preliminary winnowing and leave the choice to the whole body of alumni from a field of half a dozen or more of aspirants? Or some combination of the two methods, if one can be suggested?
All the time, we must believe, the vital question concerns the provision of the best obtainable board of college directors, rather than the mere mechanism by which they are to be secured. There are strong practical reasons on behalf of each suggested method of procedure, and strong practical objections to each. A prayerful consideration of the matter will, it is hoped, lead the great majority to approve the well known doctrine that "whate'er is best administered is best" and to agree that the mere formularies by which results are achieved should be judged by what they produce, rather than by their seeming lack of democracy, or their seeming conformance to democracy.
